Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm,thp,compaction,cma: allow THP migration for CMA allocations

[Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>]

On 2/28/20 2:21 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-02-27 at 15:41 -0800, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>> On 2/27/20 1:32 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>>
>>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> @@ -8253,14 +8253,19 @@ struct page *has_unmovable_pages(struct
>>> zone *zone, struct page *page,
>>>  
>>>  		/*
>>>  		 * Hugepages are not in LRU lists, but they're movable.
>>> +		 * THPs are on the LRU, but need to be counted as
>>> #small pages.
>>>  		 * We need not scan over tail pages because we don't
>>>  		 * handle each tail page individually in migration.
>>>  		 */
>>> -		if (PageHuge(page)) {
>>> +		if (PageHuge(page) || PageTransCompound(page)) {
>>>  			struct page *head = compound_head(page);
>>>  			unsigned int skip_pages;
>>>  
>>> -			if
>>> (!hugepage_migration_supported(page_hstate(head)))
>>> +			if (PageHuge(page) &&
>>> +			    !hugepage_migration_supported(page_hstate(h
>>> ead)))
>>> +				return page;
>>> +
>>> +			if (!PageLRU(head) && !__PageMovable(head))
>>
>> Pretty sure this is going to be true for hugetlb pages.  So, this
>> will change
>> behavior and make all hugetlb pages look unmovable.  Perhaps, only
>> check this
>> condition for THP pages?

Oh right you are.

> Does that need to be the following, then?
> 
>      if (PageTransHuge(head) && !PageHuge(page) && !PageLRU(head) &&
> !__PageMovable(head))
>                  return page;

I would instead make it an "else if" to the "if (PageHuge(page)...)" above.

> That's an easy one liner I would be happy to send in
> if everybody agrees that should fix things :)
>